Curious as to why the Izzie community has not condemned Huma--Hillary's ice cream/caramel split--who is Muslim and comes from Muslim parents...but who married a Jew (disgraced Congressman Weiner) and is also likely being "bearded" by Weiner as she'n'Hill snack on each other. Where is Izzie outrage?

Zane Smith is a U.S. Marines Drill Sergeant, the L.A. Raiders’ defensive trainer, and Sun Tzu, realized in one hulking, 380-pound shell. He has no room for idleness. The Committee for American Freedom and Enterprise, Inc., had been transformed from a rec-room operation into a realistic menace, thanks to Zane’s “pain=gain” philosophy. While I sucked lungsful of black Lebanese hash in London, Zane was busy making it into the Arizona papers, earning CAFE the exposure we would need for to pull off such a vicious campaign.

Sacrificing America: A Shocking Look at the Voting Record of Arizona Congressman John McCain was launched at a news conference of the Phoenix Press Club, to the stunned horror of the Party Establishment. Zane had approached it like any PR pro, and the results were impressive. The Arizona Republic — mouthpiece of the status quo that it is — dismissed us as being “outside the rank-and-file” and “with an axe to grind.” Which was true, in a sense, but irrelevant. The same dumb logic that might shrug off the Baeder-Meinhoff Gang or the Weathermen as “just another group of student-types.”

However, the Chandler Tribune pushed out a kindly article, entitled, “Fighting for the Right,” which did Zane and I the service of announcing our inevitable intention as future office-seekers. I felt that we should send that particular reporter a good bottle of scotch or something, but Zane disagreed.

“Back from the land of the dead,” he smiled, wriggling through my parents’ front door. “You need a haircut.”

Which was probably also true, but I didn’t see any real or compelling reason to start in with personal eccentricities — at least not until I’d had the chance to unwind, maybe get accustomed to American thinking again. Besides, I hadn’t had good luck with barbers lately.

“We just scored a coup,” Zane grinned.

“Oh?”

“Uh-huh. Sam Steiger just finished the forward to the McCain booklet.”

“Big deal,” I said. “Probably lots of people will read it.”

“Huh-uh,” he smiled, even wider. “Writing it. I didn’t tell you, because I wanted it to be a surprise.”

And it was. Sam Steiger was once an All-Star power-hitter for the Right — a renegade Republican and self-described “New York Jew horse-trader,” who had left the House in 1976 to run for U.S. Senate. Steiger had entered the Arizona State Senate from a backroom Flagstaff bar — encouraged by drink, that he could somehow become “the people’s candidate,” despite a genetic ethnicity problem which might have otherwise gotten him chased out of town like so many money lenders, were it not for a rugged, common-man farmer sort-of-redneck appeal that earned him the role of favorite adopted son in Congressional District 3, stretching from north Scottsdale to the Utah border. But in 1976, in his second term, Steiger went brow-to-brow against another Congressional monolith, John Bertrand Conlan.

Conlan was Irish, to Steiger’s semitic roots. Born-again against Jew, and the race poured blood. Conlan championed “the Christian vote,” and irked Arizona’s secular establishment to the extent that they dumped him in favor of Steiger for the Republican nomination. Many of Conlan’s supporters, as the story goes, couldn’t bear to usher a Jew into office, and shifted enough of their weight to elect Democrat Dennis DeConcini, who held the office for many terms, despite early claims toward avoiding the tag of “career politician.”

Steiger saw trouble after the bitter defeat. His sons were busted on drug charges. Then he, himself, was arrested after some heavy tippling for killing two wild burros at his Flagstaff ranch. His defense was classic private ownership: “I can shoot a jackass on my property anytime I feel like it…the beasts were eating my flowers.” But the public turned on him when a veterinarian concluded that both animals had been shot from behind.

He ran for Governor as a Libertarian in 1982, after losing GOP Party support, and garnered a stunning 13% of the vote, with a platform that read something like: “If elected, I will not serve. I will not use taxpayer’s monies on such a bogus and wasteful system as this.”

I opened Sacrificing America to the forward, sat back and smiled deliriously…

“I have always been skeptical of legislative voting records made by special interest groups, in that the title of the legislation frequently has little bearing on the content or affect of that legislation. What is most useful in this analysis of Mr. McCain’s voting patterns is the comparison with two identifiable Arizona conservatives: Congressmen Stump and Rudd. Clearly, there is a strong and significant difference in philosophy and understanding of the Arizona electorate between these gentlemen. Once again, Mr. McCain’s lack of identity with Arizona and its views is brought home. Perhaps most dramatic of all is the clear message that imprisonment by communist captors does not necessarily enhance one’s knowledge of the dangers of communism. Hopefully, the results of this effort by these younger Arizona conservatives will be to increase Mr. McCain’s understanding of the Arizona constituency he purports to represent.” Sam Steiger — Former United States Congressman

Steiger’s disillusionment with McCain was longstanding. Once, in an opinion piece to Northern Arizona Life, he wrote of McCain: “In my little war, Korea, if you got captured, it meant you had screwed up. If you stayed captured for any length of time, it meant you had not tried to escape and, therefore, you spent a great deal of time explaining why you did not escape.”

#NeverTrump leader Bill Kristol is floating a new name in his search for an establishment presidential candidate to mount an independent run to undermine presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump: John McCain.

Kristol tweets that McCain was in DC raising money for his Senate reelection bid against his conservative primary challenger, Dr. Kelli Ward.

Dr. Ward — who polls have shown tied with Senator McCain in the Republican primary on August 30 — pounced on the Kristol tweets.

“Hillary Clinton supporter Bill Kristol is the worst sort of establishment hack,” she said in a statement to Breitbart News...

The rise of Donald Trump is threatening the power of neoconservatives, who find themselves at risk of being marginalized in the Republican Party.

Neoconservatism was at its height during the presidency of George W. Bush, helping to shape the rationale for the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

But now the ideology is under attack, with Trump systematically rejecting each of its core principles.

Whereas neoconservatism advocates spreading American ideals through the use of military force, Trump has made the case for nationalism and a smaller U.S. military footprint.

In what Trump calls an "America First" approach, he proposes rejecting alliances that don't work, trade deals that don’t deliver, and military interventionism that costs too much.

He has said he would get along with Russian President Vladimir Putin and sit down with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un — a throwback to the “realist” foreign policy of President Nixon.

As if to underscore that point, the presumptive GOP nominee met with Nixon's Secretary of State and National Security Adviser, Henry Kissinger, earlier this week, and delivered his first major foreign policy speech at an event last month hosted by the Center for National Interest, which Nixon founded.

Leading neoconservative figures like Bill Kristol and Robert Kagan have assailed Trump’s foreign policy views. Kagan even called Trump a “fascist” in a recent Washington Post op-ed.

"This is how fascism comes to America, not with jackboots and salutes (although there have been salutes, and a whiff of violence) but with a television huckster, a phony billionaire, a textbook egomaniac 'tapping into' popular resentments and insecurities, and with an entire national political party — out of ambition or blind party loyalty, or simply out of fear — falling into line behind him," wrote Kagan, who is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

Other neoconservatives say Trump’s foreign policy stances, such as his opposition to the Iraq war and the U.S. intervention in Libya, are inconsistent and represent “completely mindless” boasting.

“It’s not, ‘Oh I really feel that the neoconservatism has come to a bad end and we need to hearken back to the realism of the Nixon administration,’ ” said Danielle Pletka, senior vice president for foreign and defense policy at the American Enterprise Institute...

George Will--who hates Trump--made a point of the 30%-level numbers of younger voters (aged 18-29) who voted...or, rather, didn't, for Mitt Romney. And how Trump will get even less.

Hence, immediate formation of a hemp+cannabis panel at the federal and Gubernatorial-(National Governors Conference) level.

Hillary was a stoner in her university years; she is also a coward. Assuming Trump--like Ron Paul--has never smoked pot, he is free to study hemp+cannabis as an inexhaustible energy resource (oil; fibers; medical relief source) for America.

That's your "youth vote," George Will. Trump will swamp Hillary if he "goes Green" on ganja.

Donald Trump announced for president on June 16, 2015. And this happened.

NBC and the Wall Street Journal released a national poll days later. Here's how the Republican primary field looked:

You'll notice Trump didn't make that graphic. That's because he was getting one -- yes ONE -- percent of the vote in the hypothetical Republican primary race. That put him in the company of other one-percenters like Lindsey Graham, who has emerged as the single most vocal anti-Trump politician, and John Kasich, who will end his presidential campaign today and, in so doing, clear the field for Trump.

That wasn't even the worst news in the poll for Trump! Two-thirds of Republicans said they couldn't see themselves supporting him for president. Just 32 percent said they could imagine backing him for president. And, unlike many of his unknown Republican rivals, everyoneknew Trump's name in the poll.

Sen. John McCain, facing a tough race for Senate re-election, picked up the endorsement of U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce president Javier Palomarez.

Palomarez also was to join McCain, R-Ariz., on the campaign trail Thursday. The endorsement is believed to be the first ever by the chamber of a candidate, based on a records search.

The endorsement is significant because of Arizona's history of immigration crackdowns and their effect on Latinos in the state. The frontrunner status of Donald Trump, and his anti-immigrant rhetoric, has been seen as a potential negative for down-ballot candidates like Sen. McCain, particularly those in states with high Latino voting populations. The share of Latinos in Arizona who are eligible voters is 21.5 percent.

McCain was a target of Trump, who mocked the senator, a former Vietnam prisoner of war. Trump said McCain was not a war hero and said he wasn't a fan of McCain, because he only likes people who weren't captured.

McCain did not fare well with Latino voters in his 2008 bid for president, which he lost to Barack Obama in the general election that year. He drew criticism from some for shifting right on his immigration views. But in 2013, he was part of the Gang of Eight that wrote and helped pushed through the Senate a comprehensive immigration reform bill.

"I am honored to receive the endorsement of the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce ... Hispanic businesses are vital to Arizona's economy and add to the cultural fabric of our state," McCain said in a statement.

Palomarez said in a statement that McCain had served the state "with nobility and undeniable zeal."

"From uniting the nation through bipartisan legislation in the wake of September 11th, to working alongside the USHCC to urge the swift confirmation of America's next Mexican ambassador Roberta Jacobson, to leading the passage of the comprehensive immigration reform bill through the Senate, Sen. McCain has devoted his life to placing his love of country ahead of self-interest and political partisanship," Palomarez stated.

McCain drew a primary challenger from the far right, state Sen. Kelli Ward, a conservative who has said McCain has disappointed conservatives. Also in the race, business owner Alex Meluskey. Should he survive the primary, he also could face a tough challenge from U.S. Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, D-Ariz.

Palomarez had endorsed HUD Secretary Julián Castro and New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez as potential vice presidential candidates, but neither are actual candidates at this time...

A nonprofit with ties to Senator John McCain received a $1 million donation from the government of Saudi Arabia in 2014, according to documents filed with the U.S. Internal Revenue Service.

The Arizona Republican has strictly honorary roles with the McCain Institute for International Leadership, a program at Arizona State University, and its fundraising arm, the McCain Institute Foundation, according to his office. But McCain has appeared at fundraising events for the institute and his Senate campaign’s fundraiser is listed in its tax returns as the contact person for the foundation.

Though federal law strictly bans foreign contributions to electoral campaigns, the restriction doesn’t apply to nonprofits engaged in policy, even those connected to a sitting lawmaker.

Groups critical of the current ethics laws say that McCain’s nonprofit effectively gives Saudi Arabia -- or any other well-heeled interests -- a means of making large donations to politicians it hopes to influence.

“Foreign governments are prohibited from financing candidate campaigns and political parties,” Craig Holman, the government affairs lobbyist for ethics watchdog Public Citizen, said. “Funding the lawmakers’ nonprofit organizations is the next best thing.”...

WASHINGTON – “If his poll numbers hold, Trump will be there six months from now when the Sweet 16 is cut to the Final Four, and he will likely be in the finals.”

My prediction, in July of 2015, looks pretty good right now.

Herewith, a second prediction. Republican wailing over his prospective nomination aside, Donald Trump could beat Hillary Clinton like a drum in November.

Indeed, only the fear that Trump can win explains the hysteria in this city. Here is the Washington Post of March 18: “As a moral question it is straightforward. The mission of any responsible Republican should be to block a Trump nomination and election.”

The Orwellian headline over that editorial: “To defend our democracy, the GOP must aim for a brokered convention.”

Beautiful. Defending democracy requires Republicans to cancel the democratic decision of the largest voter turnout of any primaries in American history. And this is now a moral imperative for Republicans.

Like the Third World leaders it lectures, the Post celebrates democracy – so long as the voters get it right.

Whatever one may think of the Donald, he has exposed not only how far out of touch our political elites are, but how insular is the audience that listens to our media elite.

Understandably, Trump’s rivals were hesitant to take him on, seeing the number he did on “little Marco,” “low energy” Jeb and “Lyin’ Ted.”

But the Big Media – the Post, Wall Street Journal, New York Times – have been relentless and ruthless.

Yet Trump’s strength with voters seemed to grow, pari passu, with the savagery of their attacks. As for National Review, the Weekly Standard and the accredited conservative columnists of the big op-ed pages, their hostility to Trump seems to rise, commensurate with Trump’s rising polls.

As the Wizard of Oz was exposed as a little man behind a curtain with a big megaphone, our media establishment is unlikely ever again to be seen as formidable as it once was.

And the GOP?

Those Republicans who assert that a Trump nomination would be a moral stain, a scarlet letter, the death of the party, they are most likely describing what a Trump nomination would mean to their own ideologies and interests.

Barry Goldwater lost 44 states in 1964, and the GOP fell to less than a third of Congress. “The Republican Party is dead,” wailed the Rockefeller wing. Actually, it wasn’t. Only the Rockefeller wing was dead.

After the great Yellowstone fire in the summer of ’88, the spring of ’89 produced astonishing green growth everywhere. The Yellowstone fire of the GOP was in ’64, burning up a million acres of dead wood, preparing the path for party renewal. Renewal often follows rebellion.

Republican strength today, on Capitol Hill and in state offices, is at levels unseen since Calvin Coolidge. Turnout in the GOP primaries has been running at levels unseen in American history, while turnout in the Democratic primaries is below what it was in the Obama-Clinton race of 2008...

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/03/suicide-of-gop-or-its-rebirth/#bZ7TzuKrfPC4fxXY.99

Hell Bottled Up is "an eye-opening, Gonzo journey into the dark heart of John McCain via the strange, twilight world of ultra-Right Arizona politics. Gut-wrenching, humorous and confrontational journalism issued by a propaganda specialist stationed at Ground Zero. Todd Brendan Fahey is one of the most illuminating, renegade minds in contemporary America" - Alex Burns, [former] Editor-in-Chief Disinfo.com

Fahey has been interviewed in VICE magazine (by former Mondo 2000 co-founder/editor-in-chief R U Sirius), and has written for VICE/Motherboard, Mondo 2000, High Times and other counterculture institutions of today and yesterday. His published interviews include: Ken Kesey; Timothy Leary, cyberpunk author John Shirley; media provocateur Douglas Rushkoff; nerd and genius Mark Frauenfelder, of bOING bOING ‘zine fame, and cyberspaceman John Perry Barlow.

A graduate of the Master's of Professional Writing Program at University of Southern California, Fahey was taken under the wing of Hubert Selby, Jr., [Last Exit to Brooklyn], with whom Fahey took classes for two years. Having completed Ph.D coursework in American Literature/Creative Writing at University of

Todd Brendan Fahey is currently engaged in pre-production film capacities toward screen adaptation of Wisdom's Maw.

New York education officials are defending a hotly debated plan to allow illegal immigrants to be certified as public school teachers.

Saying the district doesn’t want to “close the door on their dreams,” state Education Commissioner MaryEllen Elia explained those eligible for the teaching certification came to America as children.

“It is bad public policy."

- Hans von Spakovsky, Heritage Foundation

“They are American in every way but immigration status,” said Elia. “They’ve done everything right. They’ve worked hard in school, some have even served in the military, but when it’s time to apply for a license, they’re told, ‘Stop. That’s far enough.’”

The regents oversee 3.2 million students in 700 school districts as well as 7,000 libraries, 900 museums and 52 professions requiring more than 850,000 licensees. The controversial decision also enables the board to award licenses to illegal aliens in at total of 54 professions, including engineers, pharmacists and dentistry.

But the decision doesn’t sit well with many who believe the policy violates federal law and prevents lawful citizens from getting jobs they are qualified for.

“It is bad public policy,” said Hans von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow at the Washington D.C.-based Heritage Foundation, and a former U.S. Justice Department attorney. “It is a violation of federal immigration law.”...

Nearly 60 percent of illegal immigrants identified by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement as criminal threats are not deported and are eventually released, the latest example of the Obama administration's failed immigration policy.

Internal ICE figures show that in fiscal 2015, the agency encountered 152,393 illegal immigrants labeled a criminal threat, mostly in jails, but charged 64,116. About another 88,000 were not processed for deportation, according to the Center for Immigration Studies' Jessica Vaughan.

The numbers are even worse for those who ICE asks local police and sheriffs to detain but never collect.

Under Obama's recently announced Priority Enforcement Program, officials work with local police to arrest and deport criminal immigrants. In reality, that amounts to a phone call from ICE requesting local authorities hold the suspect for 48 hours after they're set to be freed.

But several sheriffs from around the country say that just 35-40 percent of those held are ever seized by ICE, even after they've been released.

Richard W. Stanek, sheriff of Hennepin County in Minneapolis, said he had 75 illegals ICE wanted, but the agency only picked up about 35 percent. "And these are people that they want," he told the Washington Examiner.

Susan Benton, sheriff of Florida's Highlands County, said "mine would be much much lower." Worse, she added, many are seized and sent to a federal facility in Miami and immediately released and return to her county.

It's become a huge issue for local police. Benton said she wants to help ICE and hold illegal immigrants longer, but can't legally. Often the result is more crime from the suspect and questions about why her department's jail frees them...

What can be said about a culture that continues to watch, much less listen to the drivel that masquerades as professional journalism? Anyone who is exposed to the continuous assault on common sense and intellectual integrity must resent the insults to the intelligence of the average voter. An electorate tunes into this charade of managed and filtered questions out of habit and certainly not from a motivation of discovering solutions. The bottom line is that the entire process of Presidential election coverage is designed to keep people in the dark.

Painfully, you know who owns the media conglomerates and the statist bias reflected in their editorial selections. You also know that any sincere reporting attempt, based upon objective investigative accuracy would result in getting a pink slip for an intrepid journalist.

Watching the love fest for the chosen establishment standard bearers in the Presidential debates proves just how irrelevant the mainstream media has become.

Turn off the propaganda machine and tune into the alternative media. Fair and balanced diatribes are the only thing scripted and biased worth knowing out of the media circus of lies and deceit. Lofty ethical standards do not exist from the Yellow journalism coming out of the modern day Pulitzer vs. Hearst road show. The establishment rules the news for the benefit and protection of the elites.

“Is there a First Amendment right to lie in politics? In adjudicating the constitutionality of Minn. Stat. § 221B.06, which makes it a gross misdemeanor to disseminate a political communication about a ballot measure that one knows is false, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recently said yes in 281 Care Comm. v. Arneson [PDF], throwing out a law more than 100 years old. The decision also questions whether another part of the law – making it illegal for candidates to lie – is constitutional. The court was concerned with how such a law would chill free speech, rejecting the claim that the state has an interest in preserving “fair and honest” elections and in preventing a “fraud upon the electorate.”

There are two remaining arguments used to argue that political lies should be protected by the First Amendment. One is the claim that the people should decide what is truth and that the government should not be making decisions about political orthodoxy or veracity. In general both assertions are true, but the judicial process – especially juries – make decisions about truth all the time. Juries often have to make decisions about witness credibility, determine what the facts are, and render decisions on whether libel, slander or false advertising occurred. The judicial process is all about making decisions about what is the truth. Determining whether someone has lied politically can also be judged by the people through the courts. The other claim is that there is no standard determining when someone has lied. In N.Y. Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, (1964) the court articulated the actual malice standard in the political defamation context, defining the boundary between what is and is not protected by the First Amendment.”

When people complain that politicians lie, they are only admitting that the most effective prevaricator is the one who can sell the formula for shielding the ruling oligarchy from scrutiny or accountability. How else can one explain or defend the soft ball treatment and avoidance of truly hard hitting questions to the cast of characters left in the field for coronation as the next emperor?

If the Presidential debates are empty shells of serious discourse, just what would a prudent citizen call the culture that envelopes a palisade rampart around the Fifth Estate? The arrogance and self-induced haughtiness that feeds the fabrications to shape public perception has a singular objective. Keep in the good graces of the masters of the universe as a prerequisite to maintain a career.

A would be celebrity correspondent is worse than the most militant progress academic extremist. A closet collectivist will always side with the political candidate, who advocates government expansion. As an aficionado of limited government and non-interventionist foreign policy, the BREAKING ALL THE RULES advocacy for a RadicalReactionary mindset must reject the corporatist message that only facilitates the New World Order agenda.

“I do not believe in my lifetime anybody has run for this job at a moment of greater importance, who was better qualified by knowledge, experience and temperament to do what needs to be done now.”

Who made this statement? Yep you guessed it, William Jefferson Clinton, speaking about his estranged “person of interest” and part time wife.

Substitute any of the other professional “pols” who has their surrogates perfect their own spin, for the hildebeast, and you get the same results. Where are the media watchdogs that allow the popularization of newspeak, while ignoring the dissimilation of flat out lies? Obviously, they are practicing their suck up techniques, because a presstitute is a practitioner of hypnotizing the public.

Folks, prepare for another rigged election, superdelegate style. If you are a junkie for punishment, follow the 2016 Election Race on Facebook and subscribe to the Uncensored Political News. Wean yourself off the dependency on the talking heads from the programmed media and liberate your mind in trusted counter establishment news sources worldwide.

Now that lying is legal in the land of the controlled, that revolutionary act which George Orwell spoke about; namely, telling the truth, is the only way to combat the time of universal deceit, we all live in. A good start would be for courageous candidates to conduct a cross-examination on the media whores, who advance the globalist gulag. Become your own reliable reporter, engage in citizen journalism.

How come the really bad guys never get assassinated? In the past this question would not have the same relevance, but since the New World Order engulfed the planet, individual crowned heads have been relegated to ceremonial functions. For Americans the triple play of JFK, MLK and RFK, 1963 -1968 years proved to be a watershed. A compelling argument that the NWO put into motion the final stage of their master plan, after these shootings, add additional credence.

The official fairy tale that Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray and Sirhan Sirhan acted alone has been so completely disproven that only a “low information” kool aide drinker or a hard core establishment flag flyer buys the psyops. Without re-litigating the legal record, the most sensible arguments question if any of these three pigeons were the actual shooters.

Much like the anti-intellectual culture that flows from academia, public agencies and the corporatist media, which states that Global Warming is settled science; the mere discussion of the facts and evidence in these assassinations is decried, as being advanced by dastardly conspiracy whack cases.

Real history tells a different tale. Wikipedia has its problems as a source; however, their List of assassinated American politicians is a useful overview. Not to be undone, Wikispooks compiled a list on US/Foreign Assassinations since 1945. Even from a preliminary review, it is incontrovertible that governments are in the business of eliminating opponents or dangerous threats to their power. Childish versions of prescribed narratives of historic events that are taught in government schools or pronounced in the mass media are usually suspect and often unbelievable.

The important lesson is not to resolve the contested involvement of a lone killer, but to examine the actual pretext behind the events and plausibility of a well organized planned operation to eliminate a risk to the supremacy of the elite system.

Individuals are no longer the movers and shakers as in Napoleon’s day. Today, the coordinated globalist matrix is so prevailing that most countries have lost their influence and certainly their independent sovereignty.

With the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, World War I was ignited. The Habsburgs royalty certainly did not possess the same political dominance as Bonaparte. In a most significant manner the act of murder in Sarajevo was the beginning of the end of European monarchies. Followed soon thereafter, the Imperial House of the Romanov was eliminated with the Russian Revolution.

What is often missed in the sanitized versions of the deceptive history taught in schools and universities is that the real czars of world dominance continue their consolidation of global controlled Kingship would be abolished or at least democratized as a constitutional and ceremonial function.

The ending of the first half of the twentieth century saw the victory of the most destructive wars ever fought, won by the real rulers of the planet. Openly the formation of the United Nations pushed countries to accept a template for world governance. Illuminati, or whatever term you want to use to describe the cabal of force behind economic, military and legalized carnage, took control of international institutions and dictate policy agendas.

Now ask yourself the crucial question. If terrorism is a strategy and tactic of radical extremists, why is the fraternity of Illuminati sociopaths still living? No one is so secure or safe from a dedicated assassin willing to die in the commission of the deed.

The two attempts on Gerald Ford and the gun shot wounding to Ronald Reagan illustrates the point. Sara Jane Moore and Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme were not prototypes of trained assassins, but they were certainly Charles Mason groupie freaks. John Hinckley Jr., on the other hand, brought a sinister connection between the Bush and Hinckley families.

Under the suspicious circumstances of the death of William Colby, a sinister CIA legacy of intrigue comes full circle. Add into the mix the much covered “accident” that caused the death of Princess Diana might be interpreted as a case study in royal terror. And finally, the assassination attempt on Pope John Paul II certainly provides ample grounds of a political plot behind the gun fire.

Analyzing the specific details of each instance is not the most important task. The focus should be on why the Illuminati bloodline families are not at the top of the terrorist list. If the world was really in the grips of systemic terror, one needs to ask, why the assassins are so dumb in picking their targets.

For centuries the Rothschild Bloodline consistently heads the list of satanic globalists. Their American counterpart and junior partner has been the Rockefeller Bloodline. In the ultra extreme circles of manipulating earthly outcomes, sharing the blood of demonic DNA places the primary responsibility for global evil in the hands of metaphysical monsters.

Note that the laws of sovereign countries or judicial international courts exempt the power elites from their crimes against humanity. What other pursuit of maintaining an unjust society should the slave hordes expect from this diabolical system?

So where are these scary anarchists? Back in the early years of the last century, besieged humankind understood the nature of the mega powerful. In the twenty first century, the study of genuine history is relegated to comic books.

The terrorism that does take place is primarily sponsored and fits the playbook of globalist designs. False-Flag Terror: A Historical and Analytical Overview offers a most descriptive account of the methods used to build a culture of permanent fear in the minds of the uninformed. Evidence of misdirection and use of patsy stooges is embedded into the policy of plausible deniability. Bilderberg propaganda leads to official policy implementation. The European Union is a direct result from Illuminati influence. Brussels is a hot bed of terrorists for a reason. If the suicide bombers were all radical Islamists, why are the technocrats of the New World Order still enjoying their privileged positions in their international jihad against traditional Western Civilization?

Such a designation is a code term for goyim. A seasoned observer of the historic record knows that the Illuminati cult has more in common with the Talmud than the Gospels. In George Soros, you have the epitome of evil incarnate. So where are all those dedicated Sunni Islam ‘Wahhabists” when it comes to greeting Soros? Surely, the security around Soros is not hardened against a fanatic jihadist.

Oh no, the kosher zealots that are protected from the consequences of the terror they underwrite are the Khazars. The art of political assassination has been perfected by the intelligence agencies, which all serve the globalist agenda. The essay, ISIS - Intelligence Agencies Creation and Asset, describes the working of the deceivers.

When a termination of a quarry is deemed unsuitable for the circumstance, character assassination usually works. However, make no mistake; the ultimate goal is the demise of the useless bottom feeders. And who are the enemies of the globalists? Everyone; but those the Illuminati select to serve their interests.

Back in the pristine days of human conflict, capture the flag was the way to win a war. Living in the current singular interdependent international community of a Trilateral Commission organism, produces the quest for the supra elites to achieve Transhumanism. The global war that is progressing is not one of terror, but it is one of eradication.

The assassins that are knocking at your door will not be wearing a burqa or even a SWAT vest, but are garbed in a William Westmancott suit fitted at Savile Row in the City of London. When governments answer to the globalists and ignore their own citizens, recognizing the real terrorists should be self-evident.

Nevertheless, the phony war on terror continues to feed the 24/7 news cycle with more fabrications and lies. Only when the top echelon of globalists becomes fair game to the blowback from their assassinations will the phony terror and false flags cease.

The central banksters system of financial debt enslavement is the primary vehicle for continued chaos and unending warfare. The world became cultured, or so we are told, with The Death of Dueling. Sadly, recourse for a transgression of honor is no longer civilized. In its place is organized assassination by those, who dishonor the rest of society. This is the forbidden history you are prohibited from learning...

NEW ORLEANS, LA (WVUE) - The flood of refugees migrating from the terror in Syria and Afghanistan has begun to have a trickle effect in the New Orleans area.

"We had served two families, we're expecting one more soon, and we do not know how many more, but we expect more," said Martin Gutierrez of Catholic Charities, which is part of the Archidiocese of New Orleans.

Catholic Charities has targeted services for helping refugees.

"So it's a matter of uniting the families, which is something that the church really promotes, obviously. Some of them don't have relatives and we try to help them become integral parts of our communities," Gutierrez said.

But some have argued against the U.S. accepting Syrian refugees, fearing terrorists might slip through the cracks. We turned to former New Orleans FBI chief and anti-terrorism expert Jim Bernazzani for insight on whether that's a legitimate concern. Before coming to New Orleans, Bernazzani worked to ramp up the nation's anti-terror strategies after 911.

"If I was in charge of ISIL, logistically I'd take advantage of this situation and put my people in, into the United States," Bernazzani said. "Now with that said, the FBI is on top of this big time with our Joint Terrorism Task Force and we have what's called a Terrorist Screening Center that these individuals will be run through."

But make no mistake, not every refugee seeking admission to the U.S. would face such scrutiny.

"It's going to be the 18- to 45-year-old male for the most part," he said. "It's a percentage game. It's not fail-safe, but it's a percentage game."

Still, as more of the refugees take up residency in the New Orleans area, Bernazzani discourages fear.

"These are just people from another country trying to escape misery by virtue of a civil war," he said. "We had our own civil war, and so I wouldn't be worried, but I would be vigilant," he said.

As local humanitarian agencies continue to serve refugees from Syria who find their way here, "there are multiple background checks that are done on these families and it is part of our Christian faith to welcome the stranger," said Gutierrez.

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s call to end birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants has refueled the immigration debate and spilt the GOP field and legal experts who question whether such a change is possible.

Trump’s plan goes after the 14th amendment, which grants citizenship to essentially anybody born in the United States. But he is particularly focused on stopping pregnant women from illegally crossing the U.S.-Mexico border for the purpose of having a child or an “anchor baby,” which reduces the likelihood of the parents being deported.

Trump announced his plan Sunday, calling the amendment the country’s “biggest magnet for illegal immigration.” And he continues to suggest that his lawyers think the amendment might not withstand a court challenge.

“I was right,” Trump, the billionaire businessman and top GOP candidate, said Friday night at a rally in Alabama. “You can do something, quickly.”

However, other candidates and legal experts are split on the issue.

“Trump thinks ‘our country is going to hell.’ Well, there is likely little more than a chance in hell that we are going to amend the Constitution,” Jessica Levinson, a law professor at Loyola University of Los Angeles, said Wednesday. “Amending the Constitution is one of the most serious things that lawmakers can do. Therefore the path to doing it is rightfully arduous. I would put the chances … as beyond a longshot."

To be sure, changing the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, would require a two-thirds vote in Congress, then ratification from three-fourths of state legislatures. It could also be changed through a constitutional convention in which at least 34 states convene to vote on an amendment, which would then need ratification from a minimum 38 states.

Trump since announcing his candidacy in mid-June has made illegal immigrants from Mexico a top concern and has suggested several solutions -- including a wall along the southern border and the change to birthright citizenship...

Seven days prior to events which would set the world on-edge, newly-hired Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria "Torie" Clarke offered an equally startling admission to Agency France Presse wire service, but which received scant attention within U.S. media sources.

Ms. Clarke-- having been lured back into government service by pal Mary Matalin on Vice President Dick Cheney's staff, from a high-paying post as Manhattan office director for the venerable public relations firm of Hill & Knowlton--the former PR chief to Senator John McCain and one-time George Bush (the elder) staffer would divulge to foreign media that the United States, via the Pentagon and the shadowy Defense Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, would begin producing a new and potent strain of anthrax bacteria, and that such plans had been in the works since 1997. The source of the anthrax was to be from Russian stock, and, according to Ms. Clarke, would be used "purely for defensive measures."

The new strain of anthrax, engineered by Russian sources, Clarke purported, would be used to test the effectiveness of a newly-developed vaccine in the United States. "We have a vaccine that works against a known anthrax strain. What we want to do is make sure we are prepared for any surprises, for anything that might happen that might be a threat," she said.

The DoD issued this update recently to Ms. Clarke's news briefing: "the Department of Defense Cooperative Threat Reduction Program is funding a collaborative research project on anthrax monitoring with the State Research Center for Applied Microbiology in Obolensk, Russia. In August 2001 the State Research Center applied to the Russian Export Control Commission for a license to transfer the anthrax strain to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. The application is currently pending a decision of the Russian Export Control Commission, and the U.S. government will seek Russian approval of the export license."

One week after this news conference, three hijacked airliners slammed into the World Trade Center and Pentagon buildings, killing an estimated 3,100 civilian and military personnel. Shortly thereafter, white powder began to appear on the desks of prominent politicians and at news broadcast stations--most notably at NBC and American Media, headquarters of The National Enquirer tabloid--and bearing strikingly identical handwriting, each dated "09-11-01" and proclaiming the message, "Allah Is Great."

Incredibly, despite airport videotapes of Middle Eastern men boarding the various hijacked jets, and what with the messages contained on and within the anthrax envelopes and the fact that hijackers Mohammed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi had taken flight training lessons at a private airfield very near to American Media's headquarters, Boca Raton, Florida, and that al-Shehhi had rented a room in a condominium owned by the wife of American Media (National Enquirer) publisher, news reports filtered out for weeks, attempting to convince the public that FBI profilers had determined the anthrax exposures in New York, Connecticut and Florida to be the work of a "right-wing loner"; anonymous FBI sources, through the Washington Post, offered that a "popular West Coast right-wing organization" was under specific scrutiny.

Domestic critics of the government would counter that the style in which the dates were penned on the envelopes containing the anthrax spores could not be that of a person of Middle Eastern descent, which would use a script akin to: "01. 09. 11."; government sources bandied back that, the sources probably thought ahead and disguised the script. Nobody knew what to believe, and the investigations into the anthrax exposures were not (and are still not) being made known to the American citizenry.

The American public didn't bite on the "right-wing loner" theory, with no proof offered, no suspect produced, and in light of a New York Timesarticle, citing weapons expert William C. Patrick III, a U.S. microbiologist active in germ weapons design during the late 1960s. The Timesquoted Dr. Patrick as saying, of the batch sent to Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD), "he had learned details of the federal inquiry from a senior investigator. The Senate powder, Mr. Patrick said, was quite potent and capable of sailing far through the air to hurt many people.remarkably free of extraneous material. `It's high-grade,' said Mr. Patrick, who consults widely on making germ defenses. `It's free flowing. It's electrostatic free. And it's in high concentration.'" ("Contradicting Some U.S. Officials, 3 Scientists Call Anthrax Powder High-Grade," William J. Broad, 10/25/01)

Pressured by the Times report, newly-installed Director of the Department of Homeland Security, former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, announced that the type of anthrax found at all locations corresponded to a perfect genetic match to one (1) specific stock of anthrax bacilli, known as "the Ames strain," developed at the US Department of Agriculture's veterinary lab, Ames, Iowa, in the 1930s, and stored currently only at an Army biochemical research facility in Ft. Detrick, Maryland, which it is said produced via budget cuts and layoffs scores of disgruntled employees and whose inventory procedures and security was, in recent years, notoriously lax.

Within days of the failed government trial-balloon, samples of the anthrax sent to office within National Broadcasting Company and to Sen. Daschle proved what most "right-wingers" feared most: The Anthrax Was Ours.

But We Weren't Supposed to be Producing Anthrax

On December 12, 2001, media scrutiny of international treaties and U.S. law forced the U.S. Army to make an embarrassed admission: contrary to government propaganda, which had it that the U.S. had ceased producing or storing anthrax, according to terms of treaty signed by President Richard Nixon, 1969, substantial stocks of anthrax bacilli were, in fact, being stored at Dugway Proving Ground, Tooele county, Utah, with "limited quanties" still being produced, toward "defensive research" against possible airborne attacks by hostile sources. Army sources at the Dugway facility reported to FBI that all stocks of anthrax were secure and accounted for, following a thorough inventory. The same could not be said for elsewhere.

International media--tipped off by British sources at a biochemical warfare research facility in Porton Down, Salisbury, England--were informed that an investigation was underway at Porton Down, of stocks of a unique form of anthrax sent to that facility via the U.S. Army, Ft. Detrick. From the Porton Down admission, not only was it acknowledged that the U.S. government was exporting anthrax abroad, but via the "FBI's interest in a CIA contractor" who worked at the Porton Down facility, the Federal Bureau of Investigation began, as is its charter and scope, to investigate the Central Intelligence Agency, on grounds of domestic terrorism. Porton Down was later cleared of involvement in the U.S. anthrax outbreaks, after all stocks were accounted for, but not before British involvement laid the U.S. clean with a very black eye.

And still, according to the London Telegraph, and despite Tom Ridge's admission that the Florida and New York samples were identical and were that of "the Ames strain," held only at US Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases, Ft. Detrick, Maryland, FBI persisted in reporting that it "believes the attacks, which have killed five people, to be the work of a domestic terrorist, although they have not ruled out links with Osama bin Laden and his al-Qa'eda network."

The highly-milled, "weaponized" anthrax which killed five known persons, sickened dozens of others, and to which perhaps even hundreds were exposed, was not Iraqi, nor Soviet in origin. Martin Hugh-Jones, a biological researcher from Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, was quoted by the UK's New Scientist that, "while many laboratory animals are immunised with the vaccine now being given to thousands of American troops are exposed to anthrax, many are still killed by the Ames strain."

Both Soviet and Iraqi researchers favored the "Vollum strain," isolated in Oxford, England, in 1930; Gulf War-era weapons inspectors in Iraq found samples of the Vollum strain at Iraq's Al Hakam plant.

And still, according to New Scientist, "the White House reiterated last week that all anthrax mass-produced in the US was destroyed after 1969." ("Trail of Terror," Debora MacKenzie, 10/24/01)

But the White House and the Pentagon were lying. And whether by error, leak or design, the United States Government had killed five of its own citizens domestically. Torie Clarke's statement to Agency France Presse had not been valid and true: we were not "looking to procure" a stock of Russian anthrax; we were already making it, with spores bred from a stricken cow in Ames, Iowa, in secret, illegally by international treaty, and with faulty safeguards toward our citizens' safety.

Meltdown at the Pentagon: OSI Leaked from Within

On February 19, 2002, news reports began running hot and fast that the Pentagon had created formally an agency through which to "influence opinion" abroad; the Office of Strategic Influence (OSI), as it was to be called, would be run by retired Brigadier General Simon "Pete" Worden--an eccentric character, with heavy ties to former Reagan Cabinet member Frank Carlucci's Carlyle Group, given to answering his staff in fluent Russian and a master of practical jokes (hence, some say, OSI's acronymic similarity to the fictional "Office of Special Intelligence" in the 70's TV series, The Six Million-Dollar Man).

Associate Press reporter Sally Buzbee broke the story officially, citing as her source: "a defense official said Tuesday on condition of anonymity." Within minutes, the AP report had circulated to top-of-the-bar news on the popular Yahoo News site, and, moments later, was disseminated via FreeRepublic.com, where the general consensus was one of extreme discontent.

According to the AP story, "State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the department was aware of the Pentagon office but declined to discuss its functions." Deputy Director of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, addressing the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics in Washington on the day of the leak, declined comment on the report. Clearly, the Departments of State and Defense were caught off-guard and uncomfortable in addressing the issue before consulting with their superiors: Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld and George W. Bush.

While many activists and journalists stationed themselves before their keyboards with reactions to the news, Insight magazine managing editor Paul Rodriguez sought to ferret out the source of the leak. His conclusions, which are his own, but which are impressive and which have not been answered, in now-49 days of continuous inquires, by the subject herself, point to FreeRepublic.com poster and Pentagon Deputy Director of Public Affairs Victoria "Torie" Clarke. It is surmised by those who know Ms. Clarke that the strong-willed, militarily-challenged new-hire felt threatened in her public relations position by the emerging Office of Strategic Influence, to be headed by a military General. Knowing "Torie" Clarke, as I do, such a disclosure is perfectly in keeping with her character, as a power-hungry ladder-climber and self-proclaimed "statist neocon," but I'll leave this angle to Mr. Rodriguez and his staff at Insight.

1) The Pentagon, despite its protestations of ignorance, lied to the American public about its stockpile and continued production, however limited, of anthrax bacilli.

2) The White House either lied to the American public about the aforementioned Pentagon activities, or was ignorant of the Pentagon's operations and is, therefore, negligent in its executive oversight capacity of the Department of Defense.

3) The Pentagon's disinformation campaign--contrary to reports that it began on February 19, 2002, was already in motion on September 5, 2001, and Victoria Clarke, as Deputy Director for Public Affairs was its "go-to girl" on "the anthrax question."

4) Should "Torie" Clarke retain her position at the Pentagon, President George W. Bush will have committed a mockery of his promise of a "leak-free Administration," to be offered alongside his breach of promise in re: signing John McCain's Campaign Finance Reform and his opposition to "amnesty" for illegal aliens--a foetid buffet, served, as always, on the finest of bone-China to the "grassroots," in 2004, and earning him a place alongside his father, in the "read my lips" Hall of Shame.

Confidential Intelligence sources now report that Tariq Aziz, long-time aide to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and nominal "Vice Premier" of Iraq, was the finger-man behind the U.S. bombing raid on Hussein's safe-house.

Aziz was reported to have defected to Northern Iraq and/or Iran early in the U.S. campaign, by various news networks, including Fox News and MSNBC. The "defection" is now being viewed as a ruse by the Pentagon's disinformation outlets, to protect Aziz against repercussions by Iraqi insiders.

According to sources, Aziz divulged whereabouts of his boss in exchange for guarantees by the United States for his own personal survival.

Developing...

The only Christian in Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party Cabinet, and a vehement spokesman and champion of Hussein throughout the Gulf War of 1991, Mr. Aziz has held a rocky relationship with Hussein over the past 12 years. Demoted, fired, rehired, shuffled around and reassigned from and to various positions within Hussein's party hierarchy; the subject of abuse by Hussein's two sons--both believed to be dead--; Intelligence sources, speaking upon condition of anonymity to SiaNews.com, assert that Aziz accepted offers of personal security guarantees by the U.S. State Department and Department of Defense as early as March of 2002, in exchange for details leading to a "quick demise" of Saddam Hussein...

Fahey, a strategic writer stationed in South Korea, has served as aide to Central Intelligence Agency agent Theodore L. "Ted" Humes, Division of Slavic Languages, and to the late-Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) chief Lt. General Daniel O. Graham; to former Arizona Governor Evan Mecham (R-AZ), former Congressman John Conlan (R-AZ) and others.

The Mainstream press was just five weeks late with this story.

Was Tariq Aziz The Coalition's Mole?

Saddam's trusted foreign policy adviser may in fact be the Iraqi spy who provided the intelligence responsible for the cruise missile attack on the Iraqi dictator's bunker in southern Baghdad in the opening salvoes of the conflict.

By Con Coughlin

04/27/03: (Telegraph) Saddam Hussein's security chiefs placed members of Tariq Aziz's family under arrest shortly before the start of the war to make sure that the former Iraqi deputy prime minister did not defect to the West, The Telegraph can reveal.

Concerns about the fate of his family - in particular his eldest son - if he surrendered to coalition forces was Aziz's primary concern during the lengthy negotiations that finally resulted in his decision to give himself up at the end of last week.

"Tariq was still terrified of what the remnants of Saddam's regime would do to his family if he surrendered to us," said a Western security officer. "Even if Saddam were dead, he knew that there were still Ba'ath Party loyalists who would want to exact revenge on his family."

As part of Aziz's surrender terms, coalition commanders agreed to place the Iraqi politician's immediate family under the equivalent of protective custody to ensure that they were safe from revenge attacks by Saddam loyalists.

But yesterday the favourable surrender terms agreed between coalition commanders and Aziz prompted speculation that Saddam's trusted foreign policy adviser may in fact be the Iraqi spy who provided the intelligence responsible for the cruise missile attack on the Iraqi dictator's bunker in southern Baghdad in the opening salvoes of the conflict.

Intelligence officials have claimed that the information they received that allowed them to target Saddam's bunker came from a "senior official" within the Ba'ath regime, and as one of the leading members of the ruling Revolutionary Command Council (RCC) Aziz would have prior warning that Saddam was planning to hold a meeting at one of his heavily-fortified bunkers.

"You get the feeling, now that Aziz is safely in American custody, that he will be getting re-acquainted with people he has known for quite some time," said a former CIA officer who specialises in Iraq.

"The information that enabled the coalition forces to target Saddam in the opening hours of the war could only have come from someone like Aziz who had access to Saddam's inner circle."

There has been intense speculation about Saddam's fate since the attack on the bunker in the early hours of March 20. At first it was reported that Saddam had been killed in the attack, then it was suggested that he had suffered non-life threatening injuries that had been treated by a specialist team of Russian doctors.

Coalition officials appeared to confirm that Saddam had survived the initial strike when they bombed a restaurant complex in central Baghdad on April 7 at which the Iraqi dictator had been seen arriving with his younger son, Qusay, and other Ba'ath Party officials.

At the end of last week, however, President George W Bush said he believed that Saddam had either been killed or critically injured in the March 20 attack, and paid tribute to the "brave soul" who provided CentCom with the intelligence that enabled the attack to take place. Asked if the Iraqi spy was still alive, Mr Bush replied: "Yes he is. He is with us. Thank God."

Whether or not Aziz was responsible for providing intelligence about Saddam's whereabouts during the conflict, there is no doubt that the Iraqi dictator had become deeply suspicious about his deputy prime minister's intentions.

Relations between the two men had become strained in the aftermath of the Gulf war in 1991 when Saddam became concerned that Aziz, who was then his foreign minister, enjoyed too much popularity among Iraqis as a result of his well-publicised international diplomatic activities.

As the only Christian among the Sunni Muslim clique that controlled the Iraqi Ba'ath Party, Aziz has always been regarded as an outsider since he came to Saddam's attention in the 1970s for his staunch anti-Communist views, which he regularly aired in the columns of al-Thawra (The Revolution), the Ba'ath Party newspaper that he edited.

In recent years Aziz had been sidelined following his appointment as deputy prime minister, although he managed to retain his position on the all-important RCC, the Ba'athists' main decision-making body.

The only reason that Aziz managed to survive this period is that Saddam continued to rely on his expertise in foreign affairs, where his urbane charm enabled him to make an impact in countries that were eager to develop lucrative trade ties with Baghdad.

In the late 1990s, when Aziz failed to persuade the United Nations to lift the sanctions imposed on Iraq at the end of the Gulf war, Saddam briefly imprisoned the politician's eldest son as punishment.

In the weeks preceding Operation Iraqi Freedom, Saddam ordered the detention of several members of Aziz's family following suspicions that he was preparing to defect to the West.

When, shortly after the conflict started, however, Washington officials dropped heavy hints that the Iraqi official had defected, Aziz appeared before journalists in Baghdad angrily denouncing the claims, saying that he would "rather die" than be taken into custody by the Americans.

Aziz's surrender is undoubtedly an enormous propaganda coup for coalition commanders as he would never have contemplated surrendering if he thought there was any chance that Saddam or his two sons, Uday and Qusay, could continue to pose a threat.

Indeed, given his proximity to the regime, coalition commanders will be hoping that Aziz will be able to provide them with details of the fate of Saddam's family.

Whether he can bring any light to bear on the all-important issue of where Saddam's weapons of mass destruction arsenal is located is another matter.

Throughout the 30 years that Aziz worked for Saddam, he was never a member of the Iraqi dictator's inner circle and it is unlikely that he enjoyed a detailed knowledge of Saddam's biological, chemical and nuclear weapons programmes.

Pat Buchanan: If GOP has no room for The Donald's followers, it has no future

by Patrick J. Buchanan - August 14, 2015

In the Cleveland debate, Donald Trump refused to commit to support whomever the Republican Party nominates in 2016.

Trump would be wise to maintain his freedom of action.

For there is a plot afoot in the Washington Post Conservative Club to purge Trump from the Republican Party before the primaries begin.

“A political party has a right to … secure its borders,” asserts the Post’s George Will, “a duty to exclude interlopers.” Will wants The Donald “excommunicated” and locked out of all GOP debates until he kneels and takes a loyalty oath to the nominee.

“Marginalizing Trump” carries no risk of “alienating a substantial Republican cohort,” Will assures us, for these “Trumpites” are neither Republicans nor conservatives. Better off without such trash.

The Post’s Michael Gerson says “establishment Republicans” must “make clear that [Trump] has moved beyond the boundaries of serious and civil discourse.” He loathes the Trumpites as much as Will.

Trump’s followers are “xenophobic,” Gerson tells CNN. They have a “resentment of outsiders, of Mexico, of China, and immigrants. That’s more like a European right-wing party, a UKIP or a National Front in France. Republicans can’t incorporate that.”

But if the GOP has no room for Trump’s followers, it has no future. For there simply aren’t that many chamber-of-commerce and country-club Republicans.

Gerson mentions with disgust the U.K. Independence Party and France’s National Front. What do those parties have in common?

Both are anti-New World Order. Both arose to recapture the lost independence and sovereignty of their nations from the nameless, faceless bureaucrats of Brussels, those EU hacks who now dictate the kinds of laws and societies the Brits and French are permitted to have.

What motivates these folks is not all that different from what brought the farmers to Lexington Green and Concord Bridge and inspired colonists to stand by the original Tea Party boys in Boston.

New parties arise and outsiders are drawn into politics to fill voids and vacuums created by the failure of incumbent parties and politicians...

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/08/gop-elites-plot-to-purge-trump/#dJYU6v0db63YZmsf.99

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump deserves credit for forcing all 17 Republican candidates to talk about the social costs of illegal immigration, but it is not “Trump’s issue.” We will be making a fatal mistake if we let the media discuss it that way.

As Ann Coulter has pointed out, this is the most critical issue of the 2016 race because this is the issue that will define whether or not there will even be an American nation recognizable as the “home of the free and land of the brave.”

But illegal immigration is not “Ann Coulter’s issue” any more than it is “Tom Tancredo’s issue.” It is America’s issue — not only because it will define America in the 21st Century but because it also defines American elections and who will be voting in elections in 2020 and beyond. It also illuminates the power of the mainstream media to keep issues off the national stage.

Think of illegal immigration this way: If the liberal media can keep illegal alien crime out of the “kitchen table debate,” they can keep any issue out of the debate. And they will if they can get away with it. For those reasons, illegal immigration is much more than an issue of public policy; it is the poster child for media malpractice.

The media’s attempt to suppress public awareness over illegal alien crime and the effects of illegal immigration on American workers’ jobs and wages is nothing less than censorship on a massive scale. We need to start talking about it in those terms and hold the media accountable for the lack of ethical standards.

The mainstream media – including, sadly, major segments of the presumably conservative media, like the Wall Street Journal — are working overtime to keep the American public and the American voters in the dark on the scope of illegal alien crime. The murder of Kate Steinle in San Francisco exposed only the tip of a massive iceberg, and the media establishment is desperate to avoid dealing with the iceberg underneath.

Let’s look at a few numbers. You haven’t seen them in the New York Times, Atlanta Constitution, or the Miami Herald, nor have they been featured on NBC Nightly news or CNN. So, the average American is blissfully unaware of them.

Between 2008 and 2014, 40% of all murder convictions in Florida were criminal aliens. In New York it was 34% and Arizona 17.8%.

During those years, criminal aliens accounted for 38% of all murder convictions in the five states of California, Texas, Arizona, Florida and New York, while illegal aliens constitute only 5.6% of the total population in those states.